Kerala High Court
Royal Engineering Contractors vs Bajaj Finance Limited on 28 May, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 7TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 7915 OF 2024
MC NO.1008 OF 2023 OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE , ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS:
1 ROYAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, V M SHAFEER,
S/O. VENATT ABOOBACKER MOHAMMED, 9/506
VENAD HOUSE, PALAKKAL, UNION CHRISTIAN COLLEGE
P.O, ERNAKULAM, KERALA ., PIN - 683 102.
2 NASEERA K Y
AGED 39 YEARS, W/O. V M SHAFEER, VENAD HOUSE,
PALAKKAL UNION CHRISTIAN COLLEGE P.O,
ERNAKULAM, KERALA., PIN - 683 102.
3 VENATT ABOOBACKER MOHAMMED
AGED 73 YEARS, S/O. ABOOBACKER, VENADU HOUSE,
PALAKKAL UC COLLEGE P.O, UNION CHRISTIAN
COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 683 102.
4 V M SHAFEER
AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. VENATT ABOOBACKER MOHAMMED,
VENAD HOUSE, PALAKKAL UNION CHRISTIAN
COLLEGEP.O., ERNAKULAM, KERALA.,
PIN - 683 102.
BY ADVS.
SALIM V.S.
N.M.SIDHIC
A.M.FOUSI
A.B.AJIN
W.P.(C) No.7915 of 2024
:2:
RESPONDENTS:
1 BAJAJ FINANCE LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
4TH FLOOR, SURVEY 208/1-B, BEHIND WEIKFIELD
IT PARK, VIMAN NAGAR, PUNE., PIN - 411 035.
2 AUTHORISED OFFICER
BAJAJ FINANCE LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE,
4TH FLOOR, DD TRADE TOWER, KALOOR
KADAVANTHARA ROAD, COCHIN., PIN - 682 012.
BY ADV
PRADEESH CHACKO
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 28.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.7915 of 2024
:3:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 28th day of May, 2024
The petitioners have approached this Court
aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of
financial advance made by the Bajaj Finance Limited to the
petitioners, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002.
2. The respondents paid ₹51,10,705/- to the 1st
petitioner as two Business Loans in the year 2020. The
petitioners state that though the petitioners made
remittances promptly during the initial repayment period of
the financial advance, they could not pay the repayment
instalments promptly later. The repayment of loans fell into
arrears later due to financial stringency. It happened due to
reasons beyond the control of the petitioners.
3. Though the petitioners requested the respondents
to permit the petitioners to repay the overdue amounts in
easy monthly instalments, the respondent authorities were
not yielding. The authorities, instead, started coercive
proceedings, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation
and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002 and the Security Interest
(Enforcement) Rules, 2002 and issued Ext.P1 notice.
4. The petitioners state that they are still in a position
to clear the overdue amounts towards the loans, if sufficient
time is given to clear the dues in easy monthly instalments. If
the respondents are permitted to continue with the coercive
proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the
petitioners, they will be put to untold hardship and loss.
5. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf
of the respondents and denied all the statements made by
the petitioners. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted
that the loans were given to the 1st petitioner in the year
2020. The petitioners committed default in repaying the
loans.
6. The respondents repeatedly reminded the
petitioners and required them to clear the dues. The
petitioners deliberately omitted to do so. In the
circumstances, the respondents had no other go, than to
proceed against the petitioners invoking, the provisions of
the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets
and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The
impugned Ext.P1 was issued in these circumstances. The
petitioners have not advanced any legal reasons to thwart
the coercive proceedings initiated by the respondents.
7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if
the petitioners are ready and willing to make a substantial
payment soon and remit the balance overdue amount
immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted
to the petitioners to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel
submitted that the outstanding amount due to the
respondents from the petitioners as on 22.05.2024 is
₹56,60,639/- and the overdue amount as on 22.05.2024 is
₹15,46,535/-.
8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the
petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing
the respondents.
9. The specific case of the petitioners is that the
petitioners have been making the repayment and maintaining
the loan accounts initially. The default in repayment of the
loan accounts occurred lately due to reasons beyond the
control of the petitioners. The petitioners have provided
substantial security which will safeguard the interest of the
respondents.
10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am
inclined to dispose of the writ petition giving a short and
reasonable time to the petitioners to clear off the liability.
11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the
following directions:
(i) The petitioners shall remit the overdue
amount of ₹15,46,535/- in eight equal and
consecutive monthly instalments along with
accruing interest and other administrative
charges, if any. First of such instalments
shall be paid on or before 28.06.2024.
(ii) If the petitioners commit single default
in making payments as directed above, the
respondents will be at liberty to continue
with coercive proceedings against the
petitioners in accordance with law.
(iii) The petitioners shall also pay current
EMIs along with the aforesaid payments.
(iv) If the petitioners pay the instalments
as directed above, any coercive
proceedings against the petitioners shall
stand deferred.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
AMR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7915/2024
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE
DATED 17.05.2023 UNDER SECTION 13(4)
OF THE SECURITIZATION AND
RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND
ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT,
2002.
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
15.02.2024 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE
COMMISSIONER TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT
CASE NO. CS/127044/23 OF 15TH
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT,
CALCUTTA, WEST BENGAL FILED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED
02.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE 15TH
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT,
CALCUTTA, WEST BENGAL TO THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 24.02.2024 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
